Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-fscjk Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-28T12:40:02.519Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Responsibilisation on Government's Terms: New Welfare and the Governance of Responsibility and Solidarity

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  05 March 2013

Rik Peeters
Rik Peeters*
Affiliation:
Netherlands School of Public Administration, The Hague E-mail: [email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

The notion of ‘governance’ is often studied from a public management perspective and is associated with the image of a modest or even retreating state. However, ‘governance’ can also be studied from a political perspective, which focuses on issues of power and interests in governance practices. This shifts attention from a modest state to the techniques governments use to step into society and influence citizen behaviour. Whether in crime policy, youth policy or public health policy, traditional government techniques such as penalising behaviour or compensating harm are complemented by governance techniques to manage citizen responsibility and solidarity in the face of social risks.

This article deals with the question of how politicians and governments publicly frame and legitimise a new realm of state intervention dedicated to enticing, persuading and nudging citizens to ‘take responsibility’ in producing public value. An analysis of Dutch political discourse in the first decade of the twenty-first century reveals the mechanisms by which government justifies its new approach to social issues. The traditional connotations of the notions ‘responsibility’ and ‘solidarity’ are transformed in order to mobilise citizens and approach them as both part of the problem and part of the solution to various social issues. An analysis of Dutch youth policy shows how this brings about a politicisation of citizen behaviour and implicates citizens as co-operators of political will formation.

Keywords

Welfaregovernancegovernmentalityresponsibilitysolidarity
Type
Themed Section on ‘New’ Welfare in Practice: Trends, Challenges and Dilemmas
Information
Social Policy and Society , Volume 12 , Issue 4 , October 2013 , pp. 583 - 595
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2013 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Alford, J. (2009) Engaging Public Sector Clients: From Service Delivery to Co-Production, Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar
Arendt, H. (1958) Vita Activa. De mens: bestaan en bestemming, Amsterdam: Uitgeverij Boom.Google Scholar
Bekkers, V., Dijkstra, G., Edwards, A. and Fenger, M. (eds.) (2007) Governance and the Democratic Deficit: Assessing the Democratic Legitimacy of Governance Practices, Aldershot: Ashgate Publishing.Google Scholar
Bell, S. and Hindmoor, A. (2009) Rethinking Governance, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Berlin, I. (2007) Liberty, Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Boutellier, H. (2005) De Veiligheidsutopie: hedendaags onbehagen en verlangen rond misdaad en straf, Den Haag: Boom Juridische Uitgevers.Google Scholar
Boutellier, H. (2011) De Improvisatiemaatschappij: over de sociale ordening van een onbegrensde wereld, Den Haag: Boom/Lemma.Google Scholar
Bovens, M. A. P. (1990) Verantwoordelijkheid en organisatie: Beschouwingen over aansprakelijkheid, institutioneel burgerschap en ambtelijke ongehoorzaamheid, Zwolle: W.E.J. Tjeenk Willink.Google Scholar
Charmaz, K. (2006) Constructing Grounded Theory: A Practical Guide through Qualitative Analysis, London: Sage.Google Scholar
Davies, J. S. (2011) Challenging Governance Theory, Bristol: The Policy Press.Google Scholar
Eisenhardt, K.M. (1989), ‘Building theories from case study research’, Academy of Management Review, 14, 4, 532–50.Google Scholar
Engelen, E., Hemerijck, A. and Trommel, W. (eds.) (2007) Van sociale bescherming naar sociale investering, Den Haag: Lemma.Google Scholar
Ewald, F. (2002) ‘The Return of Descartes's Malicious Demon: An Outline of a Philosophy of Precaution’, in Baker, T. and Simon, J. (eds.), Embracing Risk: The Changing Culture of Insurance and Responsibility, Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 273–301.Google Scholar
Foucault, M. (2007) Security, Territory, Population: Lectures at the Collège de France 1977–1978, New York: Picador.Google Scholar
Garland, D. (2001) The Culture of Control: Crime and Social Order in Contemporary Society, Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Giddens, A. (1998) The Third Way: The Renewal of Social Democracy, Cambridge: Polity Press.Google Scholar
Gilbert, N. (2002) Transformations of the Welfare State, Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Habermas, J. (1962) Strukturwandel der Öffentlichkeit: Untersuchungen zu einer Kategorie der bürgerlichen Gesellschaft, Frankfurt am Main: Suhrkamp Verlag.Google Scholar
Hajer, M. and Wagenaar, H. (eds.) (2003) Deliberative Policy Analysis: Understanding Governance in the Network Society, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Hart, H. L. A. (1968) Punishment and Responsibility: Essays in the Philosophy of Law, Oxford: Clarendon Press.Google Scholar
Kelle, U. (2007) ‘The development of categories: different approaches in grounded theory’, in Bryant, A. and Charmaz, K. (eds.), The Sage Handbook of Grounded Theory, London: Sage, 193–213.Google Scholar
Kjaer, A. M. (2004) Governance, Cambridge: Polity Press.Google Scholar
Kooiman, J. (2003) Governing as Governance, London: Sage.Google Scholar
Nye, J. (2004) Soft Power: The Means to Success in World Politics, New York: Public Affairs.Google Scholar
Peeters, R. (2013) The Preventive Gaze: How Prevention Transforms Our Understanding of the State, The Hague: Eleven International Publishers.Google Scholar
Pierre, J. (ed.) (2006 [2000]) Debating Governance: Authority, Steering, and Democracy, Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Pierson, C. (2004) The Modern State, London: Routledge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rhodes, R. A. W. (1996) ‘The new governance: governing without government’, Political Studies, 44, 4, 652–67.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rhodes, R. A. W. (ed.) (2011) Public Administration: 25 Years of Analysis and Debate, Chichester: Wiley-Blackwell.Google Scholar
Rose, N. (2000) ‘Government and control’, British Journal of Criminology, 40, 2, 321–39.Google Scholar
Schmid, G. (2006) ‘Social risk management through transitional labour markets’, Socio-Economic Review, 4, 1, 1–34.Google Scholar
Sørensen, E. and Torfing, J. (eds.) (2007) Theories of Democratic Network Governance, New York: Palgrave.Google Scholar
Sunstein, C. R. and Thaler, R. H. (2003) ‘Libertarian paternalism is not an oxymoron’, University of Chicago Law Review, 70, 4, 1159–202.Google Scholar
Taylor-Gooby, P. (2008) ‘The new welfare state settlement in Europe’, European Societies, 10, 1, 3–24.Google Scholar
Thaler, R. H. and Sunstein, C. R. (2008) Nudge: Improving Decisions about Health, Wealth, and Happiness, New York: Penguin Books.Google Scholar
Trommel, W. A. (2009) Gulzig Bestuur, Den Haag: Boom/Lemma.Google Scholar
Vos, R. C. (2011) A Multidisciplinary Lifestyle Intervention for Childhood Obesity: Effects on Body Composition, Exercise Tolerance, Quality of Life and Gut Hormones, Den Haag: SMG-Groep.Google Scholar
Walters, W. (2004) ‘Some critical notes on “governance”’, Studies in Political Economy, 73, 27–46.Google Scholar
Yanow, D. (2000) Conducting Interpretive Policy Analysis, Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.CrossRefGoogle Scholar